Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Williams v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    Jerry Williams filed a petition under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 seeking relief from his conviction. The United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia denied relief. Williams appealed. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning for denying relief. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-11-19 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 98-6666

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Jerry Williams filed a petition under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 seeking relief from his conviction. The United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia denied relief. Williams appealed. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning for denying relief. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    6 views2 pages

    Williams v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Jerry Williams filed a petition under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 seeking relief from his conviction. The United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia denied relief. Williams appealed. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning for denying relief. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 98-6666

    JERRY F. WILLIAMS,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
    VIRGINIA,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District
    Judge. (CA-98-152)

    Submitted:

    September 22, 1998

    Decided:

    November 19, 1998

    Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Jerry F. Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Eugene Paul Murphy, OFFICE OF
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant seeks to appeal the district courts order denying
    relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2254 (West 1994 &
    Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district courts
    opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning
    of the district court. Williams v. Angelone, No. CA-98-152) (W.D.
    Va. Apr. 29, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the
    facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
    process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like